bklynboy

Bruce Lee and Chuck Norris are actors who's skills as martial artists help them look good in their acting roles as fighters. They get paid for acting, not for fighting. Loma is a professional fighter and he might be the best professional fighter in the world. He fights for a living. I'm not a Chuck Norris fan but he was a professional fighter. See quote from wikipedia: " In early 1968, Norris suffered the tenth and last loss of his career, losing an upset decision to Louis Delgado. On November 24, 1968, he avenged his defeat to Delgado and by doing so won the Professional Middleweight Karate champion title, which he held for six consecutive years. In 1969, he won Karate's triple crown for the most tournament wins of the year, and the Fighter of the Year award by Black Belt magazine."

name me boxer's who started their career's late at the age of 25 years old and above.:fingersx: Maricano didn't take up boxing until he was in the Army (about 20 years old). His first pro fight was when he was about 24, 25. Just went to boxrec His pro debut was when he was 23 and 7 months. Retired at 32 and died in a plane crash at 45.

I don't really see how it could have happened. Jack Johnson was so past prime and Dempsey was the biggest sport figure of the day. I don't see how something like this could have happened. Johnson hadn't fought a top fighter for 7 years and had been noticeably going down hill for the last few years he held the belt. Now, he's supposed to come back, without fighting top fighters and quietly beat the Mike Tyson of his day? Highly unlikely. Even more unlikely is this being kept quiet. This was Jack Dempsey we're talking about, a larger-than-life figure in his day. It's like saying a way past prime Doctor J took on a prime Michael Jordon in a private one-on-one and beat him. First. He wouldn't beat him years after retiring. Second. It's doubtful it would stay quiet.

Racism? It baffles me every time when I hear someone complaining about racism on whites. Seriously, get the fuck outta here with that BS. And I'm white. Racism is thinking negatively / hating someone else because of their race. If a black or a hawaiian or a japanese person hates you - a white person - BECAUSE you are white then that is racism. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Floyd and Pernell are victims of their success and the only thing holding them back is their skin color. Amazing that they dedicate their lives to a craft that can leave them incapacitated and people still look at them as if they've done nothing but bottom feed with top skill sets like Joe Calzaghe. You see what you want to see. Whitaker was very respected. He is the best defensive fighter I've ever seen. Bangers get more love. It's true. Tyson was loved in a way that Floyd, for instance, never was. But Mayweather has accomplished more. Re Calzaghe. I don't think he has many fans outside of Britain. Calslappy is not a term of endearment. I think more people liked Trinidad than Hopkins because Trinidad was a banger (and Hopkins slipped and countered). And guess what? They were both black. (Race and culture/language are not the same thing.)

For the last few years I've noticed that once a fighter loses for the first time, all of sudden he is exposed and done for. Really? When did this become the standard? Prime example is Canelo Alvarez. When Floyd beat him everybody was saying he was exposed and no good. The kid wasn't even 25 when he fought against the best boxer in the world. Can some of you guys on here let me know what you think. I don't think that's true now or ever. There may be a few fans who think that but it's rare to be undefeated for long. And undefeated does not mean that the fighter is the best in the world. Joe Gans, Willie Pep, Hank Armstrong, SRR, Ali all had defeats.

Im not overly sold on the guy He's huge and literally boils down to 175. I doubt he'll be making it for much longer He's 31 years old. I think he can continue making weight. He's 5'11 1/2. That's not tall for a light-heavyweight.

So once again a thread about what said fighter would do to Floyd but never about what Floyd would do to them Floyd is a great fighter. The best of this generation but he is not a natural welterweight. His best weight is lightweight - to junior welterweight. (136/140). Floyd would be a big underdog against a Tommy Hearns or a Sugar Ray Leonard or any ATG welterweight.

139, 147, 156 & 165? I don't think this sorta thing is uncommon. What is uncommon is GGG being within 3 or 4lbs or so in all his pro fights over a decade plus. Check out Carlos Monzon: http://boxrec.com/boxer/9036 and Marvin Hagler: http://boxrec.com/boxer/8684

They were fun to watch, had good skills but lost all their big fights Corrales was actually the lineal champion at 135 and won the ibf and wbo at 130, fought in one of the greatest championship fights ever, had better wins than they had...higher ko ratio....more champions defeated.....won more big fights Damn.....Corrales deserves to be in. Corrales, Casamayor, Freitas, Mayweather, and JLC was a golden age at 130-135 and Corrales fought them all. Simple. Gatti shouldn't be in the HOF and neither should Mancini. There should be a separate place i the hall for fan favorites.

GGG does not bring his punches straight back...he drops them to his waist. There is a reason he is matched like an 18 y/o prospect. Ah yes....the dreaded David Lemieux Matched like an 18yr old prospect? The only guy he could have - maybe - fought that he didn't was Ward. He was signed to fight Pirog in 2012 when GGG was still an unknown. Pirog had mad skills. They would have a great match up. GGG has gone after all the belt holders. I don't blame Martinez for not fighting him but I do think Cotto and definitely Canelo should have fought GGG. Instead they paid step-aside-money or dropped the belt!?! WTF? If GGG was a punk-ass nobody with no skills they would have taken him on and exposed him. They didn't. As for Ward. Didn't Ward want the fight to be 18 months and 3 fights later? Really? Sounds like bull**** to me. I favor GGG over everone from 154-168 except for Ward. Who now is a light heavy and hasn't fought at 168 for what? 3 years? Still. You may not be a GGG fan but he is a legitimate Middleweight champion. I think the best Middleweight since prime Hopkins. Does that make him an ATG? No. But he's not fighting bums (except for that last mandatory, which was a joke.)

Yout philosophy is loved by many boxing fans that loved rocky movies...and how do you think Gatti vs Ward was all about? Gatti entertained... and then Floyd just bulldozed the Italian-Canadian ala minced. This is one of the main reasons why HBO and friends hated Floyd. Most of it started with Gatti. What!?! Gatti had amazing fights against Ruelus and Patterson(?). You didn't know how good he was but you knew he had an amazing chin and amazing heart. Then he lost 3 in a row (just looked it up) to Manfredy and Robinson and was clearly out-classed. At that point you knew he got where he was on heart and chin and was not elite. I didn't see the Mayweather fight cause I knew it was a joke and he was sooo outclassed. Everyone I knew (even Italian Gatti fans) knew he was outclassed. HBO knew they could make one last piece of change from Gatti. I can't see ANYONE with half a fu(king brain who thought that Gatti could win that fight. Does anyone, even the most rah rah Russian, think that Provodnikov could beat a prime Mayweather?

Mayweather is listed as the #1 ranked p4p fighter OF ALL TIME...G.O.A.T!!!!!!LOL As long as they are consistent in their algorithm then yes. But one person's algorithm for ranking fighters is different than anothers. How do you judge wins and losses? Against whom? Rocky Marciano didn't lose and fought and beat ATGs such as Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, and Archie Moore. And yet - these guys were past prime. How do you make an algorithm that deals with these subtleties? I'm involved in that for a living (doing it for the last 15+ years) and I can't think of a good way. When is a person in his prime? How do you account for a learning curve; fighting with injuries (something you have to keep in mind when talking about fighters up until the 1970s); taking a fight at the last moment, and going into the ring without a proper training camp cause you needed the money to pay the rent. Boxrec does a good job, but like punchstats it only says so much.

Where would you rate him P4P of all time? There is no doubt he'd be one of the greatest light heavyweights that ever walked if he did. And remember my words, Kovalev will beat the whole divisions ASS! WAR KRUSHER Best LHW ever. Hell no. But if he beats Ward and clears out the division he could a be TOP 10 ATG. I would take Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore over Kovalev in heart beat. Michel Spinks and Bob Foster were excellent. As were Billy Conn, Gene Tunney, Sam Langford and Jimmy Bivens. Sh!7 light heavy is a really loaded division.

By that time it will be irrelevant as Leonard-Hearns II Or Mayweather - Pacquiao

Ward by schooling Ward is too slick, you can't beat slick unless you are more slick Kovalev is a stiff eurobum, ward will dance circles round him, teach him a boxing lesson and stop him late Except when it doesn't: such as Marciano beating Moore and Liston beating Patterson and Frazier beating Ali and Duran beating SRL ... it happens again and again. (And did Sweet Pea only lose to slicker boxers? How about Roy Jones?) And let's not forget about Bernard Hopkins. He's lost as well. Athletic skill, training, power, determination, chin, conditioning are all part of the total package. Ward is great. Now we find out how good Kovalev is. I think he is a far more refined boxer than people give him credit for. As far as the poll goes - I want to see Ward in action again before saying anything.

Wtf is a "slick boxer" technically duran was a slick boxer You raise a good point. It means different things to different people. It seems as if people use "slick" to mean skillful but not engage. That does not hold true for Ali (even though many call him slick) and certainly not for Duran.

GG needs to learn English. He sounds like he's mentally challenged whenever he's interviewed after a fight. That's why I never watch his fights. Sorry, but if I can't understand you, then I won't be watching you. Does this carry to other sports? If the Yankees (or any other team) have a pitcher who can't speak english (and uses an interpreter) do you chose not to watch that team? Or follow that sport? "bas ah ball has a been feddie feddie goode to me"

Great point. Although I'm not sure who wins at this point, one thing is for sure, if Ward wins this place will turn into a KKK strong hold. Why? A white boxer beats a black boxer and it becomes KKK time? Did it become KKK time after Kovalev beat Hopkins?

Ward by schooling Ward is too slick, you can't beat slick unless you are more slick Kovalev is a stiff eurobum, ward will dance circles round him, teach him a boxing lesson and stop him late Except when it doesn't: such as Marciano beating Moore and Liston beating Patterson and Frazier beating Ali and Duran beating SRL ... it happens again and again. (And did Sweet Pea only lose to slicker boxers? How about Roy Jones?) And let's not forget about Bernard Hopkins. He's lost as well. Athletic skill, training, power, determination, chin, conditioning are all part of the total package. Ward is great. Now we find out how good Kovalev is. I think he is a far more refined boxer than people give him credit for.

I don't know what race you are, but if you are anything other than white, you are complete moron. Black people fight usually benefit all the other non-white races, but they always sit on the sideline criticize blacks but ready to share in the black man's victory. All the racial changes to US constitution blacks fought for and every other non-white race benefit. If you guys are too weak fight then sit your @ss down and shut up, we will make sure you are ok afterwards. Ummm, the 13 Amendment was fought for by abolitionists and other white people. Not saying the black slaves did not want freedom but the fight was done on their behalf by white people. The 14 and 15th Amendment were completed at about the same time. So, as far as the US Constitution goes that was it. Now were there court cases such as Brown v Board of Ed? Yes. But that is not a change to the US Constitution now was it? And don't forget Thurgood Marshall had many, many white people working with him. Does the above mean the stupid "white help stupid black man" no. Of course not. But don't forget that there were many white people who hated the racist bull**** and wanted change. There are racist policemen. It doesn't mean that every white person thinks "that's ok."

Put GGG on PPV and lets see how many buys he gets. We can laugh about it later. How about we get away from PPV? It might make a few people more money but it hurts the sport. Do you think the NBA or NFL would be doing better if it was on PPV? I don't. PPV is not a measure of how good someone is.

Brutal. This is the textbook example of a great post. factual yet bulletproof. Except there were few facts there. It's true that a lot of GGG's supporters over rate his accomplishments but his detractors are just as wrong. Cotto's career in a nutshell -- HoF bound - FACT GGG's career in a nutshell -- still chasing WW and Jr. MW - trash talk Daniel Geale -- a tune up for Cotto - true Daniel Geale -- GGG's greatest pro accomplishment - FALSE (Martin Murray) Cotto at 34 -- fourth weight class - FACT Golovkin at 33 -- still in his first class - FACT (but so what?) Cotto keeps -- moving up in class and beating guys bigger than him - FACT Golovkin keeps -- running away from Ward and guys who would represent challenges - trash talk Cotto's MW accomplishments -- in two fights greater, than GGGs MW resume - if Martinez was at full strength you would be correct Golovkin's MW accomplishments -- hinges on beating a washed up former Jr. WW - trash talk Cotto will always be -- greater than GGG - perhaps but conjecture Golovkin will always be -- a flash in the pan - 12 fights of taking out ranked TOP 20 is not a flash in the pan (not saying it's greatness like GGG fans make it out to be) Cotto/GGG will look like -- Garcia/Matthyse - your opinion. For all you know it may be a great fight with GGG winning.

Quillin is better than any of GGG's opponents and can punch too I'm not going to say that GGG has a world class resume. He doesn't. But I would rate Murray above Quillin.

To me all these "jr." divisions are garbage. If GGG was to move up, move up to 175. to hell with 168. Ward and GGG should both move to 175 The original divisions, even to this day, still have way more meaning. Boxing has gone all to sh|t, fighters trying to suck every last drop of water out of their bodies in order to gain an advantage. Look what Canelo is doing to himself. It would fix itself if they went back to same day weigh ins. GGG, Canelo, and Ward would suddenly be bigger guys. All Lt Heavyweights. I couldn't agree more - bring back same day weigh-ins.

If you heard, DOWN GOES MAYWEATHER !!! No. But I wouldn't be "unhappy" either. I would probably be standing up and screaming and shouting and hoping to see something great in the next few seconds and rounds.

Let's be real: Maidana is a limited brawler, tailor made for Floyd. Floyd will win by 120-108 on all three cards. There is NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER of Maidana winning or even knocking Floyd down. That's what Jersey Joe thought when facing Marciano. :-) I don't think Maidana has a chance in hell of winning this fight. But it may yet be entertaining. We'll see.

A ray mercer 15-20 years removed from his prime is not a good win imo. Yeah. Mercer was way past his mid 1990s prime - but he was still an experienced, accomplished boxer and miles above Leapai, Pianeta and Wach. On the flip side he was 41 or so and 5 years or so since fighting Holyfield, Lewis and Witherspoon.

Personally I don't see the backhand as being effective, the hammerfist is only going to be used from a mounted position like in MMA. Both bear significant chance of injuring your hand. That said I don't think the back hand should be illegal because I don't see any extra risk to your opponent and alot of guys hit with backhands by mistake when throwing unorthodox jabs. It wouldn't change the game because its a useless strike and it would cut down on unneeded penalty calls. Hearns is a good example, that flicker jab had to hit a couple of people with the back hand every now and then but it was probably too fast for the ref to tell. And if the backhand was legal then forearm smashes and elbows would harder to call. Miss with a right - now backhand your opponent's head (oops ... was that my forearm? ... my bad). In boxing you strike and remove your arm/glove; there is no grabbing (hear that Klitschko), pawing, holding, forearm hits, elbows, etc...

I would venture a guess that the rules don't allow open glove punching due to the interior lacing and associated risk of severe (if not permanent) eye injury. I would also venture a guess that the rules don't allow backhands because they look feminine and retarded. Open palm allows one to grab, to poke and backhands are very effective. If I miss with a right and then backhand you and follow with a left hook while my open right hand is covering your eyes and holding your head you would think it's pretty effective as well. I just resaw the Lennox Lewis - Michael Grant fight. Take a look at the effect of a LL uppercut combined with him holding down Grant's head - that greatly increased the effect of the punch.